Title
Bogabong vs. Balindong
Case
A.M. No. RTJ-18-2537
Decision Date
Aug 14, 2019
Elected barangay official contested appointment of replacement; judge granted TRO, WPI, and execution pending appeal without bond or evidence, ruled grossly ignorant of law, abused authority.

Case Summary (A.M. No. RTJ-18-2537)

Factual Antecedents

Abdulsamad Bogabong had served as the First Kagawad and assumed the role of Barangay Chairman in a hold-over capacity following the death of the incumbent chairman and the failure to hold elections. Despite the recognition by the local Department of the Interior and Local Government (DILG) of Bogabong's authority, the Marawi City Mayor appointed Omera Hadji Isa-Ali to the position. Bogabong contested this appointment, resulting in a DILG-ARMM resolution affirming his position. Subsequently, Omera initiated legal proceedings against Bogabong, leading to several rulings by the respondent-judge that ultimately favored Omera, prompting Bogabong's appeal.

Administrative Charges

The complaint against respondent-judge Balindong cited gross ignorance of the law, grave abuse of authority, and partiality. Specific instances included granting a temporary restraining order (TRO) and a writ of preliminary injunction (WPI) without requiring the applicant to post a bond, as mandated under the Rules of Court, and granting execution pending appeal, which lacked sufficient justification.

Respondent-Judge's Defense

In response to the charges, Balindong maintained that he conducted his duties with impartiality and rationality, asserting that any errors were mere judgments that did not warrant administrative sanctions. He highlighted that the complainant failed to file a supersedeas bond which would have mitigated the enforcement of the writ of execution.

Findings of the Office of the Court Administrator

The Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) reviewed the case and substantiated the complaints against Balindong, finding that he exhibited gross ignorance of the law and abuse of authority. The OCA noted his disregard for established legal standards and jurisdictional limitations as evidenced by his repeated errors, constituting a serious infraction subject to disciplinary action.

Court's Ruling and Final Penalty

The Court upheld the findings of the OCA and concluded that the respondent-judge displayed gross ignorance by failing to adhere to simple and basic legal principles, specifically regardi

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.